General Lee
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Posts
- 20,442
Mr. Bi-Polar strikes again. What is your opinion, Mr. Genius, on why the arbitrators said they are treating this as a merger of equals? HMMMMMMMMM.
And how many times has "future aircraft parkings" been figured into an award. ANSWER=0. So, why would DALPA spend almost an entire day trying to convince 3 experienced arbitrators that they should take that into account?
Think "rookies"
You guys are really hung up on this "equals" thing. Guess what? Bloch was saying neither of us was failing, while the other one was rescuing the other. (that goes against your "we are bringing in so much money while you are in debt" argument). Also, that equal thing blows away your "super duper premium flying" idea.
And does future parkings influence arbitrators? You say it does not. What about faulty computer models? Your SLI computer model had 94 DC9s in the mix, along with all of your 787s flying by July 1st of 2009. Do you really think that will happen? Your computer model said so----since it took a "snapshot" at Jan 1st of 2008. Our guy slammed your guy on the stand. How many DC9 captains did it figure in again? Ummmmm, 415. Riiight. And, your MEC chair was asked if he had heard about any future furloughs from your CEO, and he stated interestingly enough "I don't recall....." Wouldn't the FIRST thing as an MEC chair ask to the CEO if he heard about any possible furloughs be "How many are we talking about?" He said he didn't recall, and our lawyer reminded him it was 200-350. Could that be used in the SLI? It was about the FUTURE.......Oh yeah, and your computer model also left out the 8 extra 777s we WILL be getting by July 1st of next year (Boeing just agreed to it, and they are working again). Darn computers! And is there any reason why part of the transcripts are "confidential"? Could that include our future business plans? (like the possibilities of losing certain flying?) Would that be important? I would think so.
Bye Bye--General Lee
Last edited: